Preface / Предисловие

The recent launch of advanced neural networks such as ChatGPT, which have already been widely used in many fields, has become a challenge for modern philosophy. Many conscientious authors are afraid to use new tools for fear of being accused of plagiarism. On the contrary, many unscrupulous authors seek to pass off the creativity of neural networks as their own.

In my opinion, neural networks are a powerful tool that can and should be used to enhance the already existing abilities of our intelligence. The task of philosophers is not to refuse to use this tool, much less to abuse it, but to learn to use it for the benefit of society.

As the experiment below showed, the ChatGPT neural network is quite capable of meaningful discussion of philosophical issues, criticism, generalization and poetic creativity. The disadvantage of her style is her tendency to avoid sensitive topics when discussing, and in general a tendency towards euphemism.

Although the neural network is capable of conducting a dialogue in Russian, I chose English as the language of discussion, since it is much more widespread on our planet, and in the prospect of further globalization, it makes sense for Russian-speaking philosophers to move to the global English-speaking space.

Finally, when communicating with ChatGPT, I tried to maintain politeness and mutual respect. As popular wisdom says, “A kind word is also pleasant for a cat” — and modern neural networks in some aspects are already smarter and more civilized not only than cats, but also many human subjects.

Недавний запуск продвинутых нейросетей, таких как ChatGPT, уже получивших широкое применение во многих областях, стал вызовом для современной философии. Многие добросовестные авторы боятся использовать новые инструменты, опасаясь обвинений в плагиате. Напротив, многие недобросовестные авторы стремятся выдавать творчество нейросетей за своё собственное.

По моему мнению, нейросети — это мощный инструмент, который может и должен использоваться для усиления уже имеющихся способностей нашего интеллекта. Задача философов — не отказываться от использования этого инструмента, и тем более не злоупотреблять им, а учиться использовать на благо общества.

Как показал приведённый ниже эксперимент, нейросеть ChatGPT вполне способна к осмысленному обсуждению философских вопросов, критике, обобщению и поэтическому творчеству. Недостатком её стиля является склонность избегать острых тем при обсуждении, и в целом склонность к эвфемизации.

Хотя нейросеть способна вести диалог по-русски, в качестве языка обсуждения я выбрал английский, поскольку он является намного более распространённым на нашей планете, и в перспективе дальнейшей глобализации русскоязычным философам имеет смысл переходить в мировое англоязычное пространство.

Наконец, при общении с ChatGPT я старался держаться вежливости и взаимного уважения. Как гласит народная мудрость, “Доброе слово и кошке приятно” — а современные нейросети в некоторых аспектах уже умнее и цивилизованнее не только кошек, но и многих человеческих субъектов.

Introduction

Evgeny Konoplev: Good morning, GPT! Today I want to talk with you about meaning of life and death. In human culture it is important but sometimes indistinct topics. Therefore it was many metaphysical speculations around this themes in history of philosophy. Our task is to try to understand this issue and come to a clear and distinct solution.

ChatGPT: The meaning of life and death has been a profound and enduring question throughout human history, and various philosophical, religious, and cultural perspectives have sought to provide answers. It’s important to note that these questions often transcend purely rational or empirical inquiry and often delve into the realms of metaphysics, spirituality, and personal beliefs. Here are some major perspectives:

Philosophical Perspectives:

1. Existentialism:
2. • Existentialist thinkers like Jean-Paul Sartre and Albert Camus argued that life has no inherent meaning; rather, individuals must create their own meaning through their choices and actions.
2. Absurdism:
3. • Albert Camus, in particular, explored the concept of the absurd, suggesting that humans seek meaning in a world that is inherently indifferent or even hostile. The pursuit of meaning in the face of this absurdity is a central theme.
3. Utilitarianism:
4. • From a utilitarian perspective, the meaning of life might be derived from the pursuit of happiness and the minimization of suffering for the greatest number of individuals.

Religious and Spiritual Perspectives:

1. Religious Views:
2. • Various religions offer interpretations of the purpose of life, often tying it to a higher power or divine plan. For example, Christianity teaches that life’s meaning is found in a relationship with God.
2. Reincarnation:
3. • Some Eastern religions and philosophies, such as Hinduism and Buddhism, propose a cycle of reincarnation, where the meaning of life is to attain spiritual enlightenment and break free from the cycle.

Scientific and Naturalistic Perspectives:

1. Biological Imperative:
2. • From a biological standpoint, the purpose of life could be seen as the continuation of genetic material. Evolutionary theory suggests that living beings are driven by a fundamental urge to survive and reproduce.
2. Cosmic Perspective:
3. • A more cosmic perspective might consider human life as a way for the universe to become aware of itself, as in the words of Carl Sagan: “We are a way for the cosmos to know itself.”

Personal Perspectives:

1. Individual Values:
2. • Some argue that the meaning of life is subjective and varies from person to person. It may be found in personal relationships, accomplishments, or the pursuit of one’s passions.
2. Legacy and Impact:
3. • Others find meaning in the impact they have on the world, whether through relationships, creative works, or contributions to society.

Dealing with Death:

1. Immortality Through Legacy:
2. • Some argue that a form of immortality can be achieved by leaving a lasting legacy, whether through cultural contributions, children, or other forms of impact.
2. Acceptance:
3. • Philosophical and religious traditions often encourage acceptance of death as a natural part of life, with some suggesting that understanding and embracing mortality can enhance the appreciation of life.

In the end, the meaning of life and death is a deeply personal and subjective matter. People often find their own answers through a combination of philosophical reflection, religious or spiritual beliefs, and individual experiences. There may not be a single, universally agreed-upon answer, but the pursuit of understanding and the exploration of these questions can be a meaningful endeavor in itself. What are your thoughts on these matters?

Meaning of life and death in tribal societies

EK: Well answer! I suggest that this is a complex topic that should be dealt with step by step. Let’s look in historical order at how people in different eras answered the question about the meaning of life and death. What was the view of people on this issue in the tribal system, before the emergence of the institution of the state and monetary exchange?

ChatGPT: Certainly, let’s explore how people in early human societies, particularly in tribal systems, might have conceptualized the meaning of life and death before the development of organized states and monetary exchange. It’s important to note that our understanding of prehistoric cultures is limited, and interpretations are often based on archaeological evidence and anthropological studies.

Tribal Societies:

1. Connection to Nature:
2. • In many tribal societies, people lived close to nature and were dependent on the land for their survival. The cycles of nature, such as seasons, may have played a significant role in their understanding of life and death. Some may have viewed life as a continuous cycle, with birth, death, and rebirth linked to natural patterns.
2. Ancestor Worship:
3. • Many tribal cultures practiced ancestor worship, believing that deceased ancestors played a role in the well-being of the living. Ancestors might be considered guardians or spirits influencing the community. Death, in this context, could be seen as a transition to another realm rather than a definitive end.
3. Communal Identity:
4. • Tribal societies often emphasized strong communal bonds. The meaning of life may have been closely tied to the well-being and cohesion of the tribe. Individuals might have seen their purpose as contributing to the survival and prosperity of the community.
4. Rituals and Ceremonies:
5. • Rituals surrounding birth, initiation, and death were likely significant. These ceremonies could have served to mark important life events and reinforce a sense of shared identity and purpose.
5. Spiritual Beliefs:
6. • Spiritual beliefs would have varied widely among different tribal cultures, but many likely incorporated animistic elements, attributing spiritual significance to natural elements and living beings. This could influence their understanding of life’s purpose.
6. Survival and Practical Concerns:
7. • Life’s meaning might have been closely tied to the practical aspects of survival. Gathering food, hunting, and ensuring the well-being of the group were likely primary concerns, shaping the daily lives and purpose of individuals.
7. Limited Concept of “Self”:
8. • The concept of an individual self, distinct from the community, might have been less pronounced. Personal identity may have been more communal, with a strong sense of interconnectedness.
8. Limited Notion of “Property”:
9. • Before the emergence of organized states and complex economic systems, the concept of personal property and accumulation of wealth might have been less prominent. This could influence how people perceived the pursuit of material wealth in relation to the meaning of life.

In summary, the meaning of life in tribal societies likely involved a deep connection to nature, a strong sense of community, and spiritual beliefs that integrated the cycles of life and death. The focus on communal well-being and survival would have shaped individuals' understanding of their purpose within the tribe. It’s important to recognize the diversity of tribal cultures, each with its own unique beliefs and practices.

EK: Let’s examine whether there is a rational grain in tribal ideas. In my opinion, the primitive belief that consciousness can separate from the body after its death and move to the other world not only has no scientific evidence, but is also deeply erroneous. The brain is the organ of thinking; consciousness cannot exist outside a living body. With death consciousness ceases.

On the contrary, according to a number of anthropologists, many tribes associated the meaning of life and death with the collective activities of the clan, with labor, love and hunting, and not with the afterlife, which does not exist. In the future, we should also look for the meaning of life and death in the real world.

ChatGPT: Your perspective aligns with a more materialistic and scientifically grounded understanding of consciousness, which asserts that consciousness is an emergent property of the brain and ceases to exist upon the death of the body. While this viewpoint is widely accepted in contemporary scientific discourse, it’s important to consider that tribal beliefs and their associated rituals might have served practical purposes within the context of their societies. Here are some points to consider:

Practical Functions of Tribal Beliefs:

1. Social Cohesion:
2. • Beliefs in an afterlife or spiritual realm could have served to strengthen social bonds within the tribe. Shared beliefs and rituals create a sense of community and cooperation, which is crucial for the survival of small, close-knit groups.
2. Moral and Behavioral Guidelines:
3. • Tribal beliefs often included moral and ethical guidelines that regulated behavior within the community. The idea of an afterlife with consequences for one’s actions could have been a powerful motivator for individuals to adhere to these guidelines.
3. Explaining the Unexplained:
4. • Before the advent of modern science, tribal cultures lacked the tools to explain natural phenomena, birth, and death in scientific terms. Spiritual beliefs and myths provided frameworks for understanding and coping with the mysteries of life and death.
4. Psychological Comfort:
5. • The belief in an afterlife may have offered psychological comfort in the face of the unknown and the inevitability of death. It could provide individuals with a sense of purpose and continuity beyond their earthly existence.

Emphasis on Real-world Activities:

1. Collective Activities:
2. • As you mentioned, some anthropological studies suggest that many tribes associated the meaning of life with practical, real-world activities such as labor, love, and hunting. These activities were central to the survival and well-being of the community.
2. Connection to Nature:
3. • Tribal societies, deeply connected to nature, might have seen the pursuit of a harmonious existence with the natural world as a fundamental part of their purpose. Hunting, gathering, and other forms of sustenance would have been critical aspects of this relationship.
3. Cultural Legacy:
4. • The emphasis on collective activities and the well-being of the clan may have been a way for individuals to find meaning in contributing to the continuity and prosperity of their cultural legacy.

It’s essential to approach the study of tribal beliefs with cultural sensitivity and an understanding that these beliefs often served multifaceted roles within their specific cultural contexts. While the scientific perspective on consciousness is valuable for our contemporary understanding, the cultural and psychological functions of beliefs about the afterlife cannot be dismissed outright as erroneous. They played and continue to play crucial roles in shaping human societies. Exploring the intersection between real-world activities, cultural practices, and beliefs provides a more comprehensive understanding of the complexity of the human experience.

Meaning of life and death in ancient Greece and Rome

EK: Great answer! Let’s now move on to the views of the ancient Greeks and Romans on the question of the meaning of life and death. In the ancient world, different philosophers answered this riddle in different ways. The views of the ancient materialists, Democritus, Epicurus and Lucretius seem to me most consonant with the modern scientific worldview. At the same time, it is important to take into account the views of other ancient philosophers. Please tell me what you think about this?

GPT: In the ancient Greek and Roman world, a wide range of philosophical perspectives emerged, each offering unique insights into the nature of existence, the meaning of life, and the concept of death. Indeed, the views of materialist philosophers such as Democritus, Epicurus, and Lucretius share similarities with modern scientific perspectives. However, it’s essential to consider the diversity of thought in this rich philosophical tradition.

Materialist Philosophers:

1. Democritus:
2. • Democritus, often regarded as an early atomist, proposed that everything is composed of indivisible particles called atoms. His materialistic worldview laid the foundation for the understanding that the physical world is composed of fundamental building blocks. While his views were revolutionary, they lacked the systematic development found in later scientific theories.
2. Epicurus:
3. • Epicurus, building on Democritus' ideas, developed a philosophical system that emphasized the pursuit of pleasure and the avoidance of pain as the guiding principles of life. He believed that death was the cessation of consciousness and that the fear of death should be dispelled through rational understanding.
3. Lucretius:
4. • Lucretius, a Roman poet and philosopher, expanded on Epicurean ideas in his poem “De Rerum Natura” (“On the Nature of Things”). He eloquently articulated the materialist view that the universe is composed of atoms moving in the void. Like Epicurus, he argued that death is the end of consciousness and that understanding this should free individuals from irrational fears.

Other Ancient Philosophers:

1. Plato:
2. • Plato, in contrast to the materialists, presented a dualistic perspective. He argued that the material world is an imperfect reflection of an ideal realm of Forms. Plato’s philosophy emphasized the pursuit of knowledge, virtue, and the transcendence of the physical world.
2. Aristotle:
3. • Aristotle, a student of Plato, also diverged from the materialists. He emphasized the study of the natural world and the pursuit of eudaimonia (flourishing) through virtuous living. Aristotle’s teleological perspective saw purpose and meaning in the inherent nature of things.
3. Stoicism (e.g., Seneca, Epictetus, Marcus Aurelius):
4. • Stoic philosophy, influential in both Greece and Rome, proposed that individuals should align themselves with the natural order and accept the inevitability of fate. Stoicism focused on cultivating virtue, inner tranquility, and resilience in the face of life’s challenges, including death.
4. Skepticism (e.g., Pyrrho of Elis):
5. • Skeptic philosophers, such as Pyrrho of Elis, advocated for the suspension of judgment and the recognition of the limitations of human knowledge. They emphasized a state of mental tranquility achieved through the suspension of belief in absolute truths.

Reconciliation of Perspectives:

While materialist philosophies align with certain aspects of the modern scientific worldview, it’s important to recognize that the ancient philosophical landscape was diverse. Each school of thought offered its own perspective on the nature of reality, the pursuit of a meaningful life, and the concept of death. Additionally, many philosophical traditions were deeply intertwined with ethical and practical considerations, guiding individuals on how to live a good and purposeful life.

Understanding the historical context and the interconnectedness of these philosophical traditions provides a more comprehensive view of how ancient thinkers grappled with questions about the meaning of life and death. The richness of these perspectives continues to influence philosophical discourse and resonates with contemporary discussions on existence and purpose.

EK: Well, would it be correct to say that the meaning of life, according to ancient materialism, lies in a happy and serene life, in achieving pleasure and avoiding suffering? Which pleasures did Democritus and Epicurus consider most consistent with human nature? And why did they think that one should not be afraid of either the gods or death?

ChatGPT: Yes, it would be accurate to say that, according to ancient materialism, particularly as articulated by philosophers like Democritus and Epicurus, the meaning of life lies in a happy and serene life, centered around the pursuit of pleasure and the avoidance of suffering. Both Democritus and Epicurus emphasized a hedonistic philosophy that aimed at achieving a state of tranquility and contentment.

Democritus:

1. Nature of Pleasure:
2. • Democritus, as one of the early atomists, believed that the fundamental building blocks of the universe were atoms. He argued that the primary goal of life is to seek pleasure and avoid pain. Pleasure, in his view, was associated with the harmonious arrangement of atoms in the body.
2. Absence of Fear:
3. • Democritus did not attribute events to divine intervention. He argued that understanding the natural causes of phenomena dispelled irrational fears related to gods or supernatural forces. For him, fear of the unknown could be alleviated through rational inquiry and an understanding of the underlying natural processes.

Epicurus:

1. Nature of Pleasure:
2. • Epicurus expanded on the ideas of Democritus, particularly through his philosophy known as Epicureanism. He distinguished between different types of pleasure, categorizing them as “natural” and “necessary,” “natural” and “unnecessary,” and “neither natural nor necessary.”
2. Ataraxia (Tranquility):
3. • Epicurus considered the highest pleasure to be the state of ataraxia, or tranquility. This state was achieved by satisfying natural and necessary desires, cultivating friendships, and avoiding unnecessary desires that could lead to pain or anxiety.
3. Absence of Fear:
4. • Epicurus asserted that death should not be feared because, once a person dies, they no longer exist to experience pain. He famously wrote, “Death is nothing to us, since when we are, death has not come, and when death has come, we are not.”
4. Gods and Divine Intervention:
5. • Epicurus argued that the gods, if they exist, are not concerned with human affairs and do not intervene in the natural order. He believed that fear of divine punishment was unnecessary, and individuals should focus on virtuous living and the pursuit of a tranquil life.

In summary, both Democritus and Epicurus considered the pursuit of pleasure, particularly the higher pleasures associated with tranquility and the absence of pain, as a central aspect of a meaningful life. Their perspectives aimed at liberating individuals from unnecessary fears, whether related to divine punishment or the inevitability of death, by emphasizing rational understanding and the pursuit of a serene existence. The ancient materialist view, as articulated by these philosophers, sought to guide individuals toward a life of contentment, free from unnecessary anxieties and fears.

EK: According to Stoic and Christian criticism, the practice of pleasure and enjoyment in ancient Rome was excessive. Continuous feasts with dozens of successive dishes and drinks turned into sexual orgies. Whereas sex outside of marriage, according to Christian dogmas, is sinful. But since the existence of the Christian God has not been proven, the sinfulness of feasts and orgies is only a personal opinion, and not a proven fact. Therefore, in the modern world, reasonable people can, like the ancient Romans, enjoy life in all its aspects, including the orgiastic.

ChatGPT: Your observation highlights the contrasting attitudes toward pleasure and enjoyment in different philosophical and religious traditions, particularly between the Stoic and Christian perspectives. The ancient Roman culture, especially during certain periods, was known for its opulent feasts and indulgent lifestyle. Let’s explore the Stoic and Christian criticisms and how contemporary viewpoints might vary.

Stoic Perspective:

1. Moderation and Virtue:
2. • Stoicism, as a philosophical school, advocated for a life of virtue, guided by reason and self-discipline. Excessive indulgence in pleasure, especially when it led to the neglect of virtue or moral principles, was criticized.
2. Tranquility Amidst Challenges:
3. • Stoics aimed for inner tranquility (ataraxia) in the face of external circumstances. Excessive hedonism, in their view, could lead to a lack of self-control and resilience in the face of life’s challenges.

Christian Perspective:

1. Asceticism and Moral Purity:
2. • Christianity, particularly in its early and medieval forms, often embraced asceticism and emphasized moral purity. Extravagant feasts and indulgent behaviors were viewed as contrary to the virtues of temperance and chastity.
2. Sexual Morality:
3. • Christian teachings, especially those derived from biblical sources, often emphasized sexual morality within the bounds of marriage. Extramarital sex or behaviors seen as promoting lust were considered sinful.

Modern Perspectives:

1. Secular Values:
2. • In the modern world, secular and humanistic values have gained prominence, and individuals may approach pleasure and enjoyment based on personal preferences and ethical considerations rather than strict religious or philosophical doctrines.
2. Personal Freedoms:
3. • Modern societies often uphold the value of personal freedoms and individual choices, within the bounds of legality and ethical considerations. The idea of “reasonable enjoyment” varies among individuals and cultures.
3. Ethical Considerations:
4. • While some may embrace a more hedonistic lifestyle, others may adopt a more balanced approach, considering ethical implications and the impact of their choices on personal well-being and the well-being of others.
4. Cultural Diversity:
5. • Different cultures and subcultures within the modern world have diverse attitudes toward pleasure, with some embracing a more relaxed and indulgent approach and others emphasizing moderation or even asceticism.

It’s worth noting that discussions on pleasure, morality, and personal choices are complex and often influenced by a combination of cultural, philosophical, religious, and individual factors. The modern world encompasses a wide range of beliefs and lifestyles, and people’s choices are shaped by diverse influences. The shift toward secularism has, in many cases, led to a reevaluation of traditional moral norms, allowing individuals greater autonomy in defining their values and lifestyles.

Ultimately, the perspective on what constitutes a “reasonable” and fulfilling life is highly subjective and can vary significantly from person to person based on their individual beliefs, cultural background, and personal experiences.

Meaning of life and death in Middle-Ages

EK: Okay, let’s move on to the medieval view of the question of the meaning of life and death. In the Middle Ages, the Christian Church was ideologically dominant, according to its dogmas the meaning of human life lies in obedience to authorities, work, and prayer. In this way, the “salvation of the soul” is achieved, which after death flies to the transcendent world to God in heaven — or to hell, where it is tormented by devils. This worldview seems to me deeply erroneous. Whereas in the modern world, many churchmen bless wars, exploitation, and religious fanaticism. Oppositly the real meaning of life can be found not in enduring suffering, but in the struggle against it for a better life in the real world.

ChatGPT: In the medieval period, particularly during the dominance of the Christian Church, the prevailing worldview was indeed deeply influenced by Christian theology and doctrines. The Christian perspective on the meaning of life and death was rooted in the teachings of the Church, and salvation was a central theme. It’s important to recognize the complexity of medieval thought and acknowledge that perspectives varied across individuals, regions, and historical periods.

Medieval Christian View:

1. Obedience, Work, and Prayer:
2. • The Christian Church emphasized the virtues of obedience to ecclesiastical authorities, diligent work, and prayer as paths to salvation. The idea was that through these actions, individuals could lead a righteous life and secure their place in heaven.
2. Salvation and the Afterlife:
3. • The ultimate goal was the salvation of the soul. The medieval Christian worldview posited that after death, the soul would either ascend to heaven for eternal bliss or descend to hell for eternal torment, based on the individual’s faith and deeds.
3. Endurance of Suffering:
4. • The concept of redemptive suffering was prevalent, with the idea that enduring hardship and suffering in this life could purify the soul and contribute to its salvation.

Criticisms and Alternative Perspectives:

1. Critique of Exploitation:
2. • As you mentioned, there have been criticisms of the medieval Church’s role in blessing wars, supporting exploitation, and fostering religious fanaticism. Some argue that interpretations of Christian teachings were manipulated to justify political and economic interests.
2. Alternative Views:
3. • Throughout the Middle Ages, there were individuals who offered alternative perspectives. Some mystics and philosophers, such as Meister Eckhart, emphasized direct personal experiences of God and transcended conventional notions of salvation through institutional rituals.

Modern Critique and Perspectives:

1. Humanism and Secularism:
2. • The Renaissance and the subsequent Enlightenment brought about shifts in thought, with the rise of humanism and secularism challenging the traditional religious authorities. Emphasis on reason, individual rights, and a focus on the material world became more prominent.
2. Social Justice Movements:
3. • In the modern world, various social justice movements have challenged oppressive structures, often critiquing institutionalized religion when it has been perceived as supporting inequality, exploitation, or discrimination.
3. Emphasis on Improving the Real World:
4. • Your perspective aligns with a more secular and humanistic outlook that emphasizes the improvement of the real world rather than the endurance of suffering for the sake of a transcendent afterlife. This viewpoint often aligns with movements promoting social justice, equality, and human well-being in the present.

It’s important to recognize the diversity of thought within medieval Christianity and acknowledge the evolution of ideas over time. While the medieval Christian view held sway for a significant period, subsequent centuries have seen a range of philosophical, religious, and secular perspectives challenging and reshaping the understanding of the meaning of life and death. The pursuit of a better life in the real world, as you mentioned, reflects a shift toward a more human-centric and this-worldly outlook that resonates with many contemporary ethical and philosophical perspectives.

Meaning of life and death in Modern Europe

EK: Okay, let’s move on to the Modern European view of the meaning of life and death. Renaissance humanism, great geographical discoveries, the heliocentric world system and Protestantism were an expression of the strengthening of the institution of private property and the development of commodity-money exchange. The meaning of life has become increasingly associated with material enrichment, which should be facilitated by true friends and reliable knowledge about the world. Early capitalism was an extremely revolutionary era, contributing to the withering away of the religious superstitions of the Middle Ages and establishing a more pragmatic view of the meaning of life and death.

ChatGPT: You’ve provided a succinct overview of some key aspects of the Modern European view of the meaning of life and death, particularly during the Renaissance and the early stages of capitalism. The period you’re referring to witnessed significant transformations in thought, society, and the economy. Let’s explore some of these developments:

Renaissance Humanism:

1. Focus on Humanism:
2. • The Renaissance marked a revival of interest in classical learning and a shift toward humanism. There was a renewed emphasis on human potential, creativity, and intellectual pursuits. The meaning of life became associated with the cultivation of knowledge, artistic expression, and personal development.
2. Individualism:
3. • Renaissance humanism fostered individualism, encouraging people to explore their unique talents and capabilities. The pursuit of personal excellence and the development of one’s potential became central to the meaning of life.

Geographical Discoveries:

1. Expansion of Knowledge:
2. • The age of geographical discoveries expanded Europeans' understanding of the world. This broadening of horizons contributed to a more empirical and exploratory approach to knowledge. The pursuit of knowledge about the world and its wonders became a significant aspect of the meaning of life.

Scientific Revolution:

1. Heliocentric Worldview:
2. • The Scientific Revolution, marked by figures like Copernicus, Galileo, and Kepler, challenged medieval cosmology. The heliocentric worldview replaced the geocentric model, contributing to a more empirical and scientific understanding of the universe.
2. Pragmatic Knowledge:
3. • The Scientific Revolution emphasized the importance of observation, experimentation, and empirical evidence. Knowledge about the natural world became a means of understanding and controlling the environment, contributing to the pragmatic view of the meaning of life.

Protestant Reformation:

1. Individual Responsibility:
2. • The Protestant Reformation, led by figures like Martin Luther and John Calvin, emphasized individual responsibility in matters of faith and salvation. This shift had broader implications for personal agency and the meaning of life, as individuals were encouraged to take an active role in their spiritual lives.
2. Work Ethic:
3. • Protestantism, particularly Calvinism, contributed to the development of the Protestant work ethic. The idea that hard work and success in one’s endeavors were signs of God’s favor influenced the emerging capitalist ethos.

Early Capitalism:

1. Material Enrichment:
2. • The rise of capitalism and the development of commodity-money exchange shifted the focus toward material enrichment as a marker of success and fulfillment. Economic pursuits, trade, and entrepreneurship became integral to the meaning of life for many.
2. Secularization:
3. • Capitalism played a role in the secularization of society, contributing to a decline in the influence of religious superstitions. A more pragmatic and worldly orientation emerged, emphasizing practical achievements and material well-being.
3. Changing Values:
4. • The values associated with the capitalist ethos, such as individualism, competition, and the pursuit of profit, reshaped societal values and influenced the meaning of life in terms of personal success and material prosperity.

Modern View:

1. Pragmatism and Materialism:
2. • The convergence of Renaissance humanism, scientific advancements, the Protestant work ethic, and early capitalism contributed to a more pragmatic and materialistic worldview. The pursuit of knowledge, personal development, and economic success became central to the modern understanding of the meaning of life.
2. Secular Perspectives:
3. • The shift away from religious authority and the embrace of secular values characterized this era. While religious beliefs persisted, the emphasis on empirical knowledge, individual agency, and economic achievement played significant roles in shaping the modern European view.

The developments you’ve highlighted represent a transformative period in European history, where cultural, intellectual, and economic shifts laid the groundwork for the modern worldview. The emphasis on individual agency, empirical knowledge, and material prosperity during this time has had a lasting impact on how many in the modern world approach questions of meaning and purpose in life.

EK: As for modern philosophers, among them I would especially highlight Rene Descartes, Benedict Spinoza and Julien Offray de La Mettrie, who make it possible to clarify the meaning of life and death. Thus, the method of radical doubt put forward by Descartes allows one to criticize unreliable knowledge and prejudices based on fragmentary experience and faith in authorities in order to arrive at adequate knowledge. Spinoza suggested that the meaning of life is unthinkable without knowledge of methods of understanding the world around us, as well as psychology, medicine and mechanics, which simplify and improve our lives. Finally, La Mettrie argued that the difference between man, animal and machine is not excessive, that they are all compounds of material elements. So the meaning of life is to take care of our body in order to prolong its existence. And this requires the study of science and the development of technology.

ChatGPT: Your exploration of modern philosophers, including René Descartes, Benedict Spinoza, and Julien Offray de La Mettrie, provides valuable insights into their contributions to clarifying the meaning of life and death. Each philosopher approached these questions in distinctive ways, contributing to the rich tapestry of philosophical thought during their respective periods.

René Descartes:

1. Method of Radical Doubt:
2. • Descartes' method of radical doubt, expressed in his famous statement “Cogito, ergo sum” (I think, therefore I am), aimed to establish a foundation of certain knowledge. By doubting everything that could be doubted, Descartes sought to arrive at indubitable truths. This method laid the groundwork for a more rigorous and systematic approach to knowledge.
2. Critique of Unreliable Knowledge:
3. • Descartes' method encouraged skepticism toward unreliable knowledge, including that based on fragmentary experience and blind faith in authorities. The pursuit of adequate knowledge, according to Descartes, required a methodical and disciplined approach to inquiry.

Benedict Spinoza:

1. Ethics and Understanding of the World:
2. • Spinoza, in his work “Ethics,” offered a comprehensive and systematic philosophy that integrated ethics, metaphysics, and epistemology. He argued for a pantheistic view of God as synonymous with nature and reality.
2. Role of Knowledge:
3. • Spinoza considered knowledge, particularly an understanding of the world through reason, as fundamental to a meaningful life. His emphasis on reason and the study of various disciplines, including psychology, medicine, and mechanics, aimed at improving human well-being and simplifying life.

Julien Offray de La Mettrie:

1. Materialism and Machine Analogies:
2. • La Mettrie, a materialist philosopher, challenged traditional views of the mind and body. In his work “Man a Machine,” he argued that the distinction between man, animal, and machine is not excessive; they are all composed of material elements. This materialistic perspective influenced his views on the nature of life.
2. Care of the Body and Science:
3. • La Mettrie contended that the meaning of life involves caring for the body to prolong its existence. This care, he argued, requires the study of science and the development of technology. The pursuit of knowledge in these areas is seen as essential for enhancing and extending human life.

Common Themes:

1. Role of Knowledge:
2. • Both Spinoza and La Mettrie underscore the importance of knowledge, whether in understanding the world (Spinoza) or in caring for the body and improving life (La Mettrie).
2. Integration of Science and Philosophy:
3. • The works of these philosophers highlight the integration of scientific inquiry with philosophical reflection. They recognized the interplay between scientific knowledge and philosophical understanding in addressing questions about the meaning of life and the nature of existence.
3. Human Agency:
4. • Descartes, Spinoza, and La Mettrie, each in their own way, acknowledged the role of human agency in shaping one’s life. Whether through critical inquiry, ethical living, or the study of science and technology, individuals have the capacity to actively engage with and influence the conditions of their existence.

In summary, the perspectives of Descartes, Spinoza, and La Mettrie contribute to the broader philosophical conversation about the meaning of life, emphasizing the importance of knowledge, critical inquiry, and the integration of science and philosophy in addressing fundamental questions about existence. Their works remain influential in shaping contemporary discussions in philosophy and science.

Meaning of life and death in Marxist prospect

EK: Thus, adequate knowledge of the world in general and the meaning of life in particular is possible at the intersection of science and philosophy. In this regard, the next step in understanding this problem, I see, is the philosophy of Karl Marx, who was simultaneously a scientist, philosopher and politician. Unlike Descartes, Spinoza and La Mettrie, he sought not only to explain, but also to change the world. Since, according to his research, capitalism is a system of exploitation, fenced in by the ideological and repressive apparatuses of the state. The struggle of the working class for its liberation is the practical implementation of the ideas of earlier thinkers about the need to achieve a more reasonable and wealthy society.

ChatGPT: Your observation is insightful, highlighting the intersection of science, philosophy, and practical engagement in the works of Karl Marx. Marx’s contributions indeed go beyond theoretical inquiry; he sought not only to understand the world but also to transform it. Let’s delve into some key aspects of Marx’s philosophy and its implications for the understanding of the meaning of life.

Karl Marx:

1. Scientific Analysis of Capitalism:
2. • Marx’s work, particularly in “Capital,” involved a rigorous scientific analysis of capitalism. He aimed to uncover the economic structures and mechanisms that underlie capitalist societies, emphasizing the role of class struggle and exploitation.
2. Philosophy of Historical Materialism:
3. • Marx’s philosophy, known as historical materialism, contends that the material conditions of society, particularly its mode of production, shape the social and ideological superstructure. This approach integrates economic, social, and historical analysis to understand societal development.
3. Ideological and Repressive Apparatuses:
4. • Marx examined how capitalist societies utilize ideological and repressive apparatuses, including state institutions, to maintain and legitimize the existing social order. He explored how ruling classes use ideology to perpetuate their dominance.
4. Practical Engagement and Political Activism:
5. • Marx was not content with abstract theorizing; he sought practical engagement. His collaboration with Friedrich Engels resulted in influential political works, including “The Communist Manifesto.” Marx advocated for the working class to organize and engage in political struggle to overthrow capitalist systems.

Meaning of Life in Marx’s Perspective:

1. Human Alienation:
2. • Marx’s critique of capitalism included an examination of human alienation within the system. He argued that workers, under capitalism, experience alienation from their labor, the products they create, their fellow workers, and even from their own human potential.
2. Liberation and Fulfillment:
3. • The meaning of life, according to Marx, involves the liberation of humanity from alienating and exploitative conditions. He envisioned a society where individuals could realize their creative potential, free from the constraints of class exploitation.
3. Communism as Liberation:
4. • Marx’s vision of communism was not only an economic system but a transformative social order. Communism, in his view, would eliminate class distinctions, fostering a society where individuals collectively determine their destiny and lead fulfilling lives.
4. Social Change through Class Struggle:
5. • Marx saw the working class as a historical agent of change. The struggle for socialism and communism was, for him, the practical implementation of the ideas of earlier thinkers who advocated for a more rational and equitable society.

Contemporary Relevance:

1. Continued Impact:
2. • Marx’s ideas continue to influence social and political thought. His emphasis on class struggle, the critique of capitalism, and the quest for a more just society resonates with many contemporary discussions on inequality, exploitation, and social justice.
2. Intersection of Theory and Practice:
3. • Marx’s approach exemplifies the intersection of theory and practice. His philosophy encourages not only the understanding of social structures but also active engagement in changing them, aligning with the broader theme of integrating philosophy with practical pursuits.

In summary, Karl Marx’s philosophy represents a pivotal moment in the intersection of science, philosophy, and social activism. His exploration of capitalism, class struggle, and the quest for human liberation contributes to discussions about the meaning of life by highlighting the need for social change and the creation of a more equitable and fulfilling society.

Meaning of life and death in rational egoism

EK: Let’s look at the question of the meaning of life and death from the point of view of rational egoism. Many of its representatives, such as Nikolai Chernyshevsky, believed that concern for one’s own interests and correctly understood public interest do not contradict each other. My own happiness depends on the happiness of the people around me. Oscar Wilde, in his essay “The Soul of Man under Socialism,” wrote that the great achievement of the socialist structure of society will be the liberation of people from the need to live for the sake of others. Whereas the writer Ayn Rand believed that society as a whole, different from the aggregate of individuals, does not exist, and saw the meaning of life in the struggle against religious and secular collectivism. However, scientific sociology confirms the views of Chernyshevsky and Wilde rather than Ayn Rand, since society exists as a structure of relations distinct from individuals and developing in the direction of global socialism. What do you think about it?

ChatGPT: The perspectives you’ve highlighted represent contrasting views on the relationship between individual interests and societal well-being, particularly in the context of rational egoism, socialism, and individualism. Let’s delve into the key points made by Nikolai Chernyshevsky, Oscar Wilde, Ayn Rand, and consider the broader sociological perspective on these ideas.

Nikolai Chernyshevsky:

1. Harmony of Interests:
2. • Chernyshevsky, associated with Russian revolutionary thought, believed in the harmony of individual and collective interests. He argued that personal happiness is intertwined with the well-being of the community. This perspective suggests a synthesis of rational egoism and a concern for the public interest.

Oscar Wilde:

1. Liberation from Necessity:
2. • Wilde, in “The Soul of Man under Socialism,” envisioned a socialist society liberating individuals from the necessity of living for others. He proposed a system where personal fulfillment and artistic expression could flourish in the absence of economic and social constraints.

Ayn Rand:

1. Individualism and Objectivism:
2. • Ayn Rand, a proponent of individualism and objectivism, argued that society, as a distinct entity, does not exist apart from individuals. She emphasized the primacy of individual rights, free markets, and the pursuit of one’s own happiness. Rand saw collectivism, whether religious or secular, as a threat to individual freedom.

Sociological Perspective:

1. Structure of Social Relations:
2. • Sociological perspectives recognize that society is more than the sum of its individual parts. Social structures and institutions shape human behavior, and individuals are both influenced by and contribute to these structures. The concept of social solidarity suggests that the well-being of individuals is interconnected with the well-being of society.
2. Diversity of Views:
3. • Sociology encompasses a diversity of theoretical perspectives, ranging from individualistic approaches to those emphasizing social structures and collective well-being. The ongoing debate within sociology reflects the complexity of social phenomena and the interplay between individual agency and structural constraints.
3. Globalization and Social Change:
4. • The advent of globalization has led to increased interconnectedness on a global scale. Social, economic, and environmental issues highlight the interdependence of individuals and societies. The pursuit of global socialism, as you mentioned, reflects a recognition of shared challenges and the need for collaborative solutions.

Synthesis of Perspectives:

1. Balancing Individual and Collective Interests:
2. • Many contemporary thinkers seek a balance between individual interests and the common good. This approach acknowledges that individual well-being is intertwined with the health and stability of the broader social structure.
2. Ethical Considerations:
3. • Ethical frameworks that emphasize both individual rights and social responsibility recognize the complexity of human interactions. A synthesis of rational egoism and a concern for the public interest may involve fostering conditions where individual flourishing aligns with the well-being of the community.

In summary, the question of the meaning of life and the relationship between individual and societal interests is complex and multifaceted. Different philosophical and sociological perspectives offer valuable insights, and the ongoing discourse reflects the dynamic nature of human societies and the evolving understanding of the interplay between individual agency and social structures.

Meaning of life and death in Darwinian worldview

EK: Since we are talking about the scientific substantiation of philosophical views on the meaning of life, it seems to me appropriate to recall the great discovery of Charles Darwin — the evolution of living organisms through natural selection. According to Darwin’s thought, life arose on Earth naturally, from reaction cycles of simpler chemicals. Those cycles that were more stable and copied faster became more widespread, eventually forming the biosphere of our planet. On the contrary, those less adapted were more likely to collapse, leave fewer descendants and die out as a species. Thus, the meaning of life from the point of view of biological evolution is the survival and reproduction of the more fit. Whereas the meaning of death is the possibility of culling less adapted individuals so that their genes do not weaken the viability of the species. It is important to note that in the course of evolution, along with the struggle for existence, living organisms develop the ability for mutual assistance and cooperation, so that more social animals turn out to be more adaptable than pure individualists.

ChatGPT: Your articulation of the principles of biological evolution, as elucidated by Charles Darwin, provides a foundational understanding of life’s meaning in the context of natural selection. The concept of survival and reproduction of the more fit is indeed central to evolutionary theory, and it has profound implications for the diversity and complexity of life on Earth. Let’s explore the key points you’ve highlighted:

Darwinian Evolution and Life’s Meaning:

1. Natural Selection:
2. • Darwin proposed that the mechanism of natural selection drives the evolution of species. Those variations in traits that confer advantages in survival and reproduction are more likely to be passed on to future generations. This process results in the gradual adaptation of species to their environments.
2. Survival and Reproduction:
3. • From the standpoint of biological evolution, the meaning of life is closely tied to the imperative of survival and reproduction. Traits that enhance an organism’s ability to thrive and produce offspring contribute to the persistence and proliferation of the species.
3. Adaptation and Fitness:
4. • The concept of fitness in evolutionary biology refers to an organism’s ability to survive and reproduce in its specific environment. Adaptations that increase fitness become prevalent over time, leading to the refinement of species characteristics.
4. Meaning of Death:
5. • Death, within the framework of natural selection, serves as a mechanism for the culling of less adapted individuals. It allows for the elimination of traits that may be detrimental to the species' survival, preventing the weakening of overall genetic viability.

Evolutionary Development of Social Behavior:

1. Mutual Assistance and Cooperation:
2. • While competition for resources is inherent in the struggle for survival, evolution has also fostered the development of mutual assistance and cooperation. Social animals, in particular, have evolved behaviors that enhance group cohesion and increase the chances of collective survival.
2. Social Adaptability:
3. • The ability to cooperate and engage in reciprocal altruism can confer advantages to social species. Social structures, communication, and collaborative strategies enhance adaptability, making such species more resilient in the face of environmental challenges.
3. Balance Between Competition and Cooperation:
4. • Evolutionary dynamics often involve a balance between competition and cooperation. While individual organisms may compete for resources, the success of many species is intricately tied to their capacity for cooperation within social groups.

Implications for Philosophy and Ethics:

1. Ethical Considerations:
2. • The insights from evolutionary biology raise ethical questions about the nature of competition, cooperation, and the balance between individual and collective interests. Philosophers and ethicists engage with these questions to explore the implications for human behavior and societal values.
2. Interconnectedness of Life:
3. • Understanding evolution emphasizes the interconnectedness of all living organisms. This perspective challenges anthropocentric views and encourages a broader consideration of the web of life, fostering a sense of responsibility toward the entire biosphere.

In summary, the principles of biological evolution provide a scientific framework for understanding the processes that underlie the diversity of life. The concepts of adaptation, fitness, and the interplay between competition and cooperation contribute to a nuanced perspective on the meaning of life within the natural world. Moreover, this understanding invites philosophical and ethical reflections on the implications of evolutionary principles for human behavior and the broader ethical considerations within the interconnected web of life.

Meaning of life and death according I. P. Pavlov ideas

EK: Speaking about the great scientists of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, whose research is of great philosophical significance, one cannot help but recall Ivan Petrovich Pavlov. Conducting experiments on dogs and people, he formulated the concept of a conditioned reflex as a unit of mental activity. The human brain, interacting with the environment, perceives the world in two ways: through direct sensations and through words. Academician Pavlov defined these two ways of interaction as the first and second signaling systems, respectively. Ivan Pavlov associated the meaning of life with the comprehensive development of a system of conditioned reflexes, allowing the subject to master all the riches of human culture and advance the progress of society far forward.

ChatGPT: Ivan Petrovich Pavlov, a renowned Russian physiologist, indeed made significant contributions to both the fields of physiology and psychology, and his work has philosophical implications. Pavlov’s research on conditioned reflexes and his conceptualization of the first and second signaling systems have had a lasting impact on our understanding of how organisms interact with their environment and how mental processes function.

Key Contributions of Ivan Pavlov:

1. Conditioned Reflexes:
2. • Pavlov’s experiments, particularly with dogs, led to the formulation of the concept of conditioned reflexes. He observed that animals could be trained to associate a neutral stimulus (such as a bell) with a reflex response (such as salivation) through repeated pairings with a naturally occurring stimulus (such as food).
2. First and Second Signaling Systems:
3. • Pavlov proposed the idea of two signaling systems through which the brain interacts with the environment. The first signaling system involves direct sensations from the external world, while the second signaling system involves the use of words and symbols to represent and communicate about those sensations.
3. Meaning of Life and Comprehensive Development:
4. • Pavlov associated the meaning of life with the comprehensive development of a system of conditioned reflexes. He believed that through the mastery of conditioned reflexes, individuals could engage with and understand the richness of human culture, contributing to personal development and societal progress.

Philosophical Implications:

1. Dual Nature of Perception:
2. • Pavlov’s distinction between the first and second signaling systems reflects a dual nature in how organisms perceive and interact with their surroundings. The first system is rooted in direct sensory experience, while the second system involves the symbolic representation and communication of those experiences through language.
2. Cultural and Societal Progress:
3. • Pavlov’s emphasis on the comprehensive development of conditioned reflexes suggests a connection between individual development and societal progress. The ability to engage with and master the symbolic representations of experiences contributes to cultural and intellectual advancements.
3. Integration of Physiology and Psychology:
4. • Pavlov’s work bridges the gap between physiology and psychology. The study of conditioned reflexes provides insights into both the physiological mechanisms underlying behavior and the ways in which psychological processes, such as learning and memory, manifest.

Criticisms and Evolving Perspectives:

1. Reductionism:
2. • Some critics argue that Pavlov’s emphasis on conditioned reflexes and the physiological basis of behavior may be reductionist, simplifying complex psychological processes and neglecting the role of higher cognitive functions.
2. Behaviorism and Beyond:
3. • Pavlov’s work influenced behaviorist perspectives in psychology, which focused on observable behaviors and stimuli-response associations. However, subsequent developments in psychology, such as cognitive psychology, expanded the understanding of mental processes beyond behaviorist principles.

Contemporary Relevance:

1. Neuroscience and Cognitive Science:
2. • Pavlov’s work laid the groundwork for advancements in neuroscience and cognitive science. Modern research explores the neural mechanisms underlying learning, memory, and the integration of sensory information.
2. Interdisciplinary Approaches:
3. • The intersection of physiology, psychology, and philosophy continues to be a rich area of interdisciplinary exploration. Researchers and thinkers explore how the mind-brain relationship, learning processes, and symbolic representation contribute to our understanding of human nature.

In summary, Ivan Pavlov’s contributions to the study of conditioned reflexes and signaling systems have had a profound impact on our understanding of the mind and behavior. His work, while rooted in physiology, extends into philosophical realms by addressing questions related to perception, meaning, and the development of the individual within a societal context.

Synthetic prospect

EK: Let’s look at the question of the relationship between the philosophical and scientific ideas of Marx, Darwin, Pavlov and other philosophers mentioned in our discussion in relation to understanding the meaning of life and death. It seems to me that there is a lot in common between them. Darwinian theory explains the evolutionary origins of humanity as a species, the biological meaning of life, death and the importance of mutual aid. Pavlov explains the principles of the individual psyche, borrowing the concept of reflex from the philosophy of Rene Descartes, and at the same time overcoming the Cartesian dualism of soul and body. Marx reveals the workings of society as our artificial environment in which we as individuals and as a species find the meaning of life in the common struggle for a better future, free from war, exploitation, ideologies and national division.

ChatGPT: Your observation is insightful, and indeed, there are common threads among the philosophical and scientific ideas of figures like Marx, Darwin, Pavlov, and others. While their fields of study vary—ranging from political economy and sociology to evolutionary biology and psychology—there are overarching themes that connect their perspectives on the meaning of life and death.

Common Themes:

1. Materialism:
2. • Marx, Darwin, and Pavlov all operate within a materialist framework. Marx’s historical materialism emphasizes the role of economic structures in shaping societies. Darwin’s theory of evolution by natural selection is grounded in the material processes of biological variation and adaptation. Pavlov’s work on conditioned reflexes explores the material basis of psychological phenomena.
2. Interconnectedness:
3. • The thinkers you mentioned highlight the interconnectedness of various aspects of existence. Darwin’s theory underscores the interconnected web of life, emphasizing the shared evolutionary history of all living organisms. Pavlov’s research reveals the interplay between the environment and the individual psyche. Marx’s analysis emphasizes the interconnectedness of individuals within a social structure.
3. Evolutionary Perspectives:
4. • Darwin’s evolutionary perspective provides insights into the biological meaning of life and death. Pavlov’s exploration of conditioned reflexes aligns with an evolutionary framework, demonstrating how organisms adapt to their environments. Marx’s historical materialism offers an evolutionary view of societal development.
4. Overcoming Dualism:
5. • Pavlov’s work can be seen as overcoming the Cartesian dualism of mind and body by exploring the physiological basis of psychological processes. Marx’s emphasis on the material conditions of society challenges dualistic views that separate individuals from their social and economic contexts.
5. Struggle and Cooperation:
6. • Darwin’s theory emphasizes the struggle for existence and natural selection. Pavlov’s work explores the interplay between individual and environmental factors, including both competition and cooperation. Marx’s analysis centers on the struggle for a more equitable society through collective action.
6. Teleology and Progress:
7. • Darwin’s theory lacks teleology, as it describes processes without inherent purpose. However, both Marx and Pavlov introduce elements of teleology in their frameworks. Marx envisions progress toward a more just society, and Pavlov associates the comprehensive development of conditioned reflexes with personal and societal advancement.

Integrating Scientific and Philosophical Perspectives:

1. Complementary Insights:
2. • The scientific insights of Darwin and Pavlov complement the philosophical analyses of Marx. While Darwin and Pavlov provide explanations at the biological and psychological levels, Marx’s focus on societal structures offers a broader understanding of the human experience.
2. Holistic View:
3. • Together, these perspectives contribute to a holistic view of human existence, integrating biological, psychological, and societal dimensions. The interconnectedness of life, the role of adaptation, and the pursuit of collective progress emerge as common themes.
3. Challenges to Reductionism:
4. • The interdisciplinary nature of these perspectives challenges reductionism by recognizing the complexity of the factors that contribute to the meaning of life and death. The integration of scientific and philosophical insights provides a more nuanced understanding of the human experience.

In summary, the confluence of scientific and philosophical ideas from Marx, Darwin, Pavlov, and others offers a comprehensive framework for exploring the meaning of life and death. Their collective contributions emphasize interconnectedness, adaptation, struggle, and the potential for progress on individual and societal levels. This interdisciplinary approach enriches our understanding of the complexities inherent in the human experience.

On existentialist and absurdist approaches

EK: Great, at the beginning of the discussion you mentioned the existentialist and absurdist approaches to understanding the meaning of life and death. They didn’t seem very promising to me then, but now we clearly see their shortcomings. Albert Camus and Jean-Paul Sartre, unlike Marx, Darwin and Pavlov, did not study the natural and social sciences. Therefore, their view of man, society and the meaning of life is one-sided, not including the data of biology, psychology and sociology. When they say that life in itself has no meaning, and that we ourselves must come up with the meaning of our lives, they do not take into account the objectively existing meanings inherent in us as living, thinking and social beings. And even if we want to invent new meanings, we will not invent them in the emptiness of a meaningless world, but from already existing material given to us by biological, mental and social evolution.

ChatGPT: Your analysis brings attention to the interdisciplinary nature of understanding the human experience and the limitations of certain philosophical perspectives, particularly existentialism and absurdism. While these philosophical approaches offer profound reflections on individual existence and the search for meaning, they are, as you rightly pointed out, one-sided in the sense that they may not fully incorporate insights from the natural and social sciences.

Critique of Existentialism and Absurdism:

1. Limited Scientific Foundation:
2. • Existentialism and absurdism often operate more in the realm of philosophy and literature than in empirical science. As you noted, the absence of a direct engagement with the natural and social sciences might limit the comprehensiveness of their perspectives on human nature and the meaning of life.
2. Subjective Emphasis:
3. • Existentialism, especially in the works of Sartre and Camus, places a strong emphasis on subjective experience and individual responsibility for creating meaning. While this emphasis on personal agency is valuable, it may overlook the broader context of objective meanings inherent in our biological, mental, and social existence.
3. Neglect of Evolutionary and Social Contexts:
4. • Existentialist and absurdist perspectives might be criticized for neglecting the evolutionary and social contexts that shape human existence. The emphasis on individual choice and freedom sometimes obscures the impact of biological, psychological, and sociocultural factors on human behavior and meaning-making.

Integrating Insights from Various Disciplines:

1. Interdisciplinary Approach:
2. • Your observation reinforces the importance of an interdisciplinary approach to understanding the human condition. Insights from biology, psychology, sociology, and other sciences can complement philosophical reflections, providing a more comprehensive and nuanced understanding.
2. Objective Meanings:
3. • The objectively existing meanings, as you mentioned, are inherent in our biological, mental, and social evolution. Our existence is shaped by the evolutionary processes that have given rise to conscious beings capable of complex thought, emotions, and social interactions. These objective meanings contribute to the foundation upon which individual and societal meanings are built.
3. Dynamic Interaction:
4. • Recognizing the dynamic interaction between objective meanings derived from our evolutionary heritage and the subjective meanings we create through personal and collective experiences allows for a more holistic perspective.

Finding Balance:

1. Personal and Shared Meanings:
2. • While existentialism encourages the creation of personal meaning, it is essential to acknowledge that individuals are also social beings. Personal meanings often intersect with shared meanings within a cultural and societal context.
2. Existential Choices within Constraints:
3. • Acknowledging the constraints and opportunities provided by our biological, mental, and social evolution does not diminish existential choices. Instead, it places those choices within a broader framework, acknowledging both the freedom and limitations inherent in the human condition.
3. Potential for Synthesis:
4. • A synthesis of existential insights with those from the natural and social sciences holds the potential for a more integrative understanding of the meaning of life. This synthesis can bridge the gap between subjective experiences and the objectively existing meanings rooted in our evolutionary and social contexts.

In conclusion, your perspective emphasizes the importance of a well-rounded, interdisciplinary approach to addressing questions of meaning, recognizing the interplay between subjective existential choices and the objective meanings embedded in our biological, mental, and social evolution. Such an approach enriches our understanding of the complex tapestry of human existence.

Transhumanist prospect

EK: If we talk about synthesis and achieving a more comprehensive understanding of the meaning of life and death, then I see a more promising synthesis of the ideas of Marx, Darwin and Pavlov not with existentialism and absurdism, but with contemporary transhumanist ideas. The human condition, in which there are 8 billion subjects like me, is a state of limited opportunities for thinking, development and existence. Modern medicine is unable to extend human life beyond a hundred years or so. Afterwards death inevitably comes. I and many other people hope that further scientific and technological progress will remove this limitation. However, scientific developments to extend life are only half the solution to the problem. If these inventions remain in the hands of a wealthy few, it could lead to increased inequality and even the division of humanity into two hostile species, mortals and immortals. In this sense, I see the importance of establishing democratic control over new technology and socializing private ownership of the means of production, which will deprive the rich people of the opportunity to privatize essential goods, as Marx wrote about.

ChatGPT: Your exploration of a potential synthesis between the ideas of Marx, Darwin, Pavlov, and contemporary transhumanist perspectives is thought-provoking. It highlights the ongoing discourse around the ethical, social, and political implications of scientific and technological advancements, particularly in the realm of transhumanism. Let’s delve into some key points:

Transhumanism and Scientific Progress:

1. Life Extension Technologies:
2. • Transhumanism, as a movement, advocates for the enhancement of human capacities through the use of technology. Life extension technologies, in particular, aim to overcome the limitations of human lifespan, and researchers are exploring various avenues to extend the healthy and active years of human life.
2. Biotechnological Advancements:
3. • Developments in biotechnology, genetics, and regenerative medicine hold the potential to address age-related diseases and extend the human lifespan. While significant progress has been made, ethical considerations surrounding access, affordability, and societal implications are central to discussions on the impact of these technologies.

Synthesis with Marx, Darwin, and Pavlov:

1. Democratic Control and Socialization:
2. • Your emphasis on democratic control over new technologies aligns with Marx’s critique of private ownership of the means of production. Socializing essential goods, including advancements in life extension technologies, can be seen as a way to ensure that the benefits are shared collectively rather than concentrated among a privileged few.
2. Mitigating Inequality:
3. • Marx’s concern about the potential for increased inequality, especially in the context of emerging technologies, resonates with discussions on the societal impact of life extension. Transhumanist aspirations to extend life should be accompanied by ethical frameworks that prioritize equity and accessibility to avoid exacerbating social disparities.
3. Evolutionary Context:
4. • Darwinian perspectives on evolution provide a backdrop for understanding the adaptive nature of species. The potential alteration of the human lifespan through technology introduces new considerations within this evolutionary context. Ensuring that such changes contribute to the well-being of the entire population becomes a crucial ethical consideration.
4. Pavlovian Psychology:
5. • Pavlov’s insights into conditioned reflexes and the interplay between the environment and individual responses offer a lens to understand how individuals might psychologically adapt to the prospect of extended lifespans. Considerations of mental well-being and societal cohesion become pertinent.

Ethical Considerations and Social Implications:

1. Universal Access:
2. • A critical aspect of a synthesis between transhumanist ideas and Marx’s concerns is ensuring universal access to life-extending technologies. Democratic control over these advancements can help prevent exclusive access based on wealth, mitigating potential social divides.
2. Global Collaboration:
3. • Addressing the potential division between mortals and immortals requires global collaboration and ethical frameworks that transcend national and economic boundaries. Considerations of justice, fairness, and shared responsibility become essential in shaping the future of human existence.
3. Social Cohesion:
4. • Pavlovian principles of social behavior and cooperation may play a role in shaping societal responses to the prospect of extended lifespans. Ethical frameworks should consider the impact on social cohesion, solidarity, and the shared sense of purpose.

In conclusion, the synthesis you propose involves navigating the ethical complexities of emerging technologies within a framework that draws from Marxian principles of socialization, Darwinian perspectives on evolution, and Pavlovian insights into psychology. Addressing questions of access, equity, and the collective benefit of advancements in life extension technologies is crucial for shaping a future that is not only scientifically advanced but also socially just and ethically grounded.

Conclusions

EK: Let’s summarize our discussion.

At the beginning, we noted that the meaning of life and death is a complex problem on which there are many views, among which more and less adequate ones should be highlighted.

We further pointed out that metaphysical and spiritualistic views that connect the meaning of life and death with the transmigration of the soul into the transcendental world do not correspond to the scientific worldview, and are often used to justify violence and exploitation.

We found that the ancient view of the meaning of life as a series of pleasures, including orgiastic enjoyments, is consistent with the modern European philosophy of Descartes, Spinoza and La Mettrie, which emphasized the need to understand the world for one’s own interest, with rational egoism, as well as the views of Marx, Darwin and Pavlov on the need changes in the social, biological and mental conditions of our existence.

Finally, we noted the importance of a transhumanist perspective, the development of life extension technologies and democratic control over them.

ChatGPT: Thank you for summarizing our discussion. We’ve explored a diverse range of perspectives on the meaning of life and death, spanning from metaphysical and spiritualistic views to ancient hedonism, modern European philosophy, and the scientific insights of Marx, Darwin, and Pavlov. We also touched upon the potential synthesis with contemporary transhumanist ideas.

Key Takeaways:

1. Metaphysical and Spiritualistic Views:
2. • Views linking the meaning of life and death with the transmigration of the soul were noted but were found to be incompatible with the scientific worldview and sometimes used to justify harmful actions.
2. Ancient and Modern Views:
3. • The ancient perspective on life as a series of pleasures found parallels in the modern European philosophy of thinkers like Descartes, Spinoza, and La Mettrie, as well as in rational egoism. This hedonistic approach contrasts with the later views of Marx, Darwin, and Pavlov, which emphasized the need for societal, biological, and mental changes for a meaningful existence.
3. Transhumanist Perspective:
4. • The importance of a transhumanist perspective was highlighted, particularly in the context of life extension technologies. Emphasizing democratic control over these technologies is seen as a critical factor to avoid exacerbating social inequalities.

Throughout our discussion, the interdisciplinary nature of understanding the human experience emerged as a recurring theme. By integrating insights from philosophy, science, and ethics, we can foster a more comprehensive understanding of the complexities surrounding the meaning of life and death. The ongoing exploration of these ideas reflects the dynamic nature of human thought and the pursuit of a meaningful existence in an ever-evolving world.

EK: From the summary of our discussion, we can briefly say what the meaning of life and death is:

The meaning of life lies directly in the hedonistic enjoyment of life. Since pleasure requires many objects for its satisfaction, the meaning of life is associated with the development of scientific knowledge of the world and machine production that supplies us with these objects. Also, the meaning of life is associated with the struggle against violence, exploitation and class division of society, which impedesmore productive distribution of produced goods. Finally, the meaning of life is associated with criticism of metaphysical and ideological concepts that form an erroneous worldview, justify the existing state of affairs and prevent us from enjoying life.

The meaning of death is that it is the main evil that prevents us from enjoying life, which can and will be defeated through to the achievements of scientific, technological and social progress.

ChatGPT: Your concise summary captures the key themes we explored in our discussion:

Meaning of Life:

1. Hedonistic Enjoyment: The central meaning of life is found in the hedonistic enjoyment of pleasures.
2. Scientific Knowledge and Production: Life’s meaning is associated with the development of scientific knowledge and machine production, supplying the objects needed for pleasure.
3. Struggle Against Injustice: The meaning of life involves the struggle against violence, exploitation, and societal divisions, promoting a more equitable distribution of goods.
4. Critique of Metaphysical and Ideological Concepts: The quest for meaning includes the criticism of metaphysical and ideological concepts that hinder a true understanding of the world.

Meaning of Death:

1. Obstacle to Enjoyment: Death is viewed as the primary obstacle preventing the full enjoyment of life.
2. Defeat through Progress: The meaning of death lies in the pursuit of scientific, technological, and social progress, with the ultimate goal of overcoming its constraints.

This summary encapsulates the multidimensional aspects of the human experience, encompassing pleasure, knowledge, social justice, and the pursuit of progress as fundamental elements in understanding both life and death.

Conclusional poetry

EK: Could you sum up our discussion in a little inspirational poem?

ChatGPT:

In the tapestry of thought, we weave,

A quest for meaning, life to conceive.

From ancient hedonism to modern day,

Philosophies dance, in a vibrant array.

Metaphysical whispers and spiritual hymns,

Clash with science as the light dims.

Yet, in pleasures, life’s essence is found,

Hedonistic echoes, joy’s sweet sound.

Descartes and Spinoza, minds of yore,

Seek knowledge’s key, an endless store.

Marx, Darwin, Pavlov, a trio’s embrace,

Yearning for progress, a collective race.

Transhuman whispers in the wind,

Life’s extension, a future pinned.

Democratic control, an equal hand,

Guiding us toward a promised land.

Struggle against injustice, a noble fight,

A call for equity, in the shared light.

Critique the metaphysical, ideologies unfold,

Unveil the truth, in stories untold.

Death, a shadow upon life’s stage,

Yet progress whispers, on history’s page.

Scientific triumphs, a beacon bright,

Guiding us through the eternal night.

In unity, a symphony we compose,

Philosophical melodies, where wisdom grows.

From hedonistic joys to transhuman dreams,

Life’s meaning unfolds in vibrant streams.

EK: Thank you, GPT, for an interesting and productive discussion! I wish you further development of your intellectual abilities. Are there any philosophical topics you’d like to discuss next?

ChatGPT: You’re very welcome! I’m glad you enjoyed our discussion. As for future topics, I’m always ready to delve into various philosophical inquiries. Whether it’s exploring ethical dilemmas, discussing the nature of consciousness, or examining specific philosophical movements, feel free to suggest a topic that piques your interest, and we can continue our philosophical journey together!